Spineless Trump seeks good relationship with Putin's Russia after Russia votes at UN against Israel

[whutTHEYsay]

namvet, post: 16393009

ts a money making terrorist scam/ OUT now and cut off ALL foreign aid

It will never happen. That's too much conspiracy theory even for Trump. Sorry to inform you.

 

[namvet]

namvet, post: 16393009

ts a money making terrorist scam/ OUT now and cut off ALL foreign aid

It will never happen. That's too much conspiracy theory even for Trump. Sorry to inform you.

its already in the senate. sorry to inform you

 

[whutTHEYsay]

its already in the senate. sorry to inform you

It's been introduced in the House and Senate every year for twenty years. It goes nowhere,


WHAT'S TRUE: A bill introduced to Congress in January 2017 would require "the President to terminate U.S. membership in the United Nations."

WHAT'S FALSE: The bill was introduced to Congress two weeks prior to Donald Trump's inauguration and has been submitted to each new Congress for the last 20 years.

FACT CHECK: Is the U.S. Pulling Out of the United Nations?


Trump has said nothing to support this insane idea.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Correll, post: 16257159

The past lack of incidents does not mean that declaring a No Fly Zone, to be enforced by US warplanes, in a warzone where Russian warplanes are operating, will not cause incidents.

Now your Idiot in Chief is calling for Safe Zones in Syria. They are to be enforced by whom and what?

Hillary wanted a NFZ over Alleppo and you called her a warmonger.

What in the hell do you think a safe zone for those opposed to the Assad/Putin regime is? They will need to be protected by US war planes and US troops on the ground. How else can they be made safe, Republican lifelong warmonger.

. Establish “safe zones to protect vulnerable Syrian populations.” The executive order tasks the secretary of defense with drafting a plan for safe zones in Syria within 90 days. This would be be an escalation of U.S. involvement in Syria and could be the first official indication of how Trump will approach the conflict there.

Trump Targets Muslims, Refugees In New Executive Order Issued On Holocaust Remembrance Day
“We don’t want them here,” he said.

Trump Targets Muslims, Refugees In New Executive Order Issued On Holocaust Remembrance Day | The Huffington Post

Trump didn't say he would make nice with Putin first and see if Putin's and Assad's Troops would protect Assad's enemies.

Of course Trump lies so much who can believe he's serious about helping Assad's enemies be safe in Syria.

And you got Trump up there grinning like a giifball with Teresa May who sure sounds like she wants the Uk and US to run the world all over again.

Just can't get the imperialism out of the Brits.

 

[Correll]

Correll, post: 16257159

The past lack of incidents does not mean that declaring a No Fly Zone, to be enforced by US warplanes, in a warzone where Russian warplanes are operating, will not cause incidents.

Now your Idiot in Chief is calling for Safe Zones in Syria. They are to be enforced by whom and what?

Hillary wanted a NFZ over Alleppo and you called her a warmonger.

What in the hell do you think a safe zone for those opposed to the Assad/Putin regime is? They will need to be protected by US war planes and US troops on the ground. How else can they be made safe, Republican lifelong warmonger.

. Establish “safe zones to protect vulnerable Syrian populations.” The executive order tasks the secretary of defense with drafting a plan for safe zones in Syria within 90 days. This would be be an escalation of U.S. involvement in Syria and could be the first official indication of how Trump will approach the conflict there.

Trump Targets Muslims, Refugees In New Executive Order Issued On Holocaust Remembrance Day
“We don’t want them here,” he said.

Trump Targets Muslims, Refugees In New Executive Order Issued On Holocaust Remembrance Day | The Huffington Post

Trump didn't say he would make nice with Putin first and see if Putin's and Assad's Troops would protect Assad's enemies.

Of course Trump lies so much who can believe he's serious about helping Assad's enemies be safe in Syria.

And you got Trump up there grinning like a giifball with Teresa May who sure sounds like she wants the Uk and US to run the world all over again.

Just can't get the imperialism out of the Brits.

With Trump, I am sure that the policy will be crafted to avoid WWIII.

With Hillary, I am sure that she would have crafted a policy assuming that the Russians would back down, and thus, risking WWIII, if they did not.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

“This would not be done just on the first day. This would take a lot of negotiation. It would also take making it clear to the Russians and the Syrians that our purpose here was to provide safe zones on the ground.” Clinton.



Correll, post: 16429086

With Trump, I am sure that the policy will be crafted to avoid WWIII.

With Hillary, I am sure that she would have crafted a policy assuming that the Russians would back down, and thus, risking WWIII, if they did not.

Trump has proposed the same exact thing.

But what the hell, we can war game Trump is on Putin's dark payroll or Putin has some KGB intelligence on Trump or his family due to their close association with so many Russian and Chinese Oligarchs. So Putin sets up fake safe zones and then a US plane gets accidentally shot down and Putin knows spineless 'owned' Trump will do nothing about it.

Also, Republicans have a much more reckless record when it comes to starting wars and f'ing the whole world up.

Iraq! Remember Iraq?

With your GWB adoration and love for killing Iraqis and our troops based on lies and your cover up that Iraq was about some unbeknownst threat, I'm am sure you will imagine some non-blame Trump theory if he repeats Bush's lies and mistakes his way into another damned quagmire, or even WWIII.

Clinton talked of carefully making Aleppo a safe zone.

.With proper planning, Clinton argued, the restriction could accomplish those goals without sparking a larger war.

“I am well aware of the really legitimate concerns you have expressed from both the president and the general,” Clinton responded. “This would not be done just on the first day. This would take a lot of negotiation. It would also take making it clear to the Russians and the Syrians that our purpose here was to provide safe zones on the ground.”

Hillary Clinton Goes All-In On Syria No-Fly Zone | The Huffington Post

She has the better record on war than your dumb Donald. She called on Bush to give the inspectors more time, thus preferring a diplomatic solution, not war. Trump didn't oppose invading Iraq until after it was started and no WMD were found. And as President speaking to the CIA Trump said maybe with a chuckle we would get another chance to seize Iraq's oil. That's sick, no way to defend killing people for their oil.

So your warmongering hero is not only a warmonger by your standards he put the world on notice he would be a war criminal as well.

I hope they lock up all the Trump boot lickers if he does act and commits a war crime or Geneva Convention violation such as ordering torture or deliberate bombing civilians as Assad and Putin have been doing.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Correll, post: 16429086

With Trump, I am sure that the policy will be crafted to avoid WWIII.

I'm sure Sec of Defense Mad Dog Mattis will construct a much less diplomatic and carefully negotiated safe zone policy in Syria than Clinton's pick would have done.

Assad and Putin are both in Iran's camp. But Mattis is of the belief that Iran supports ISIS.

Is that your belief.

.
Iran is on the mind of nearly every senior Marine I’ve ever come in contact with, including Mattis. It was back in 2012, while he was still in uniform, that Mattis said that the three gravest threats facing the U.S. were “Iran, Iran, Iran.” In the years since his retirement in 2013, he’s been even more outspoken. He repeated his “Iran, Iran, Iran” mantra last April (in addition to an entirely predictable reference to the Beirut barracks bombing) during an appearance at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, and then explained himself. Iran, he said, is “the single most enduring threat to stability and peace in the Middle East,” and not really a nation-state at all but “a revolutionary cause devoted to mayhem.”

Then, Mattis linked Iran to the rise of ISIS. “I consider ISIS nothing more than an excuse for Iran to continue its mischief,” he said. “Iran is not an enemy of ISIS; they have a lot to gain from the turmoil that ISIS creates.” What Mattis said next was eerily reminiscent of George W. Bush’s claim that because Al Qaeda wasn’t attacking Saddam Hussein, the two must be linked: “I would just point out one question for you to look into,” Mattis intoned. “What is the one country in the Middle East that has not been attacked by ISIS? One. That is Iran. That is more than happenstance, I’m sure.”

James Mattis’ 33-Year Grudge Against Iran




Being so careless with objective reality about Iran and ISIS must have been what attracted Trump to Mattis. They have so much in common in that regard.

 

[Correll]

“This would not be done just on the first day. This would take a lot of negotiation. It would also take making it clear to the Russians and the Syrians that our purpose here was to provide safe zones on the ground.” Clinton.



Correll, post: 16429086

With Trump, I am sure that the policy will be crafted to avoid WWIII.

With Hillary, I am sure that she would have crafted a policy assuming that the Russians would back down, and thus, risking WWIII, if they did not.

Trump has proposed the same exact thing.

But what the hell, we can war game Trump is on Putin's dark payroll or Putin has some KGB intelligence on Trump or his family due to their close association with so many Russian and Chinese Oligarchs. So Putin sets up fake safe zones and then a US plane gets accidentally shot down and Putin knows spineless 'owned' Trump will do nothing about it.

Also, Republicans have a much more reckless record when it comes to starting wars and f'ing the whole world up.

Iraq! Remember Iraq?

With your GWB adoration and love for killing Iraqis and our troops based on lies and your cover up that Iraq was about some unbeknownst threat, I'm am sure you will imagine some non-blame Trump theory if he repeats Bush's lies and mistakes his way into another damned quagmire, or even WWIII.

Clinton talked of carefully making Aleppo a safe zone.

.With proper planning, Clinton argued, the restriction could accomplish those goals without sparking a larger war.

“I am well aware of the really legitimate concerns you have expressed from both the president and the general,” Clinton responded. “This would not be done just on the first day. This would take a lot of negotiation. It would also take making it clear to the Russians and the Syrians that our purpose here was to provide safe zones on the ground.”

Hillary Clinton Goes All-In On Syria No-Fly Zone | The Huffington Post

She has the better record on war than your dumb Donald. She called on Bush to give the inspectors more time, thus preferring a diplomatic solution, not war. Trump didn't oppose invading Iraq until after it was started and no WMD were found. And as President speaking to the CIA Trump said maybe with a chuckle we would get another chance to seize Iraq's oil. That's sick, no way to defend killing people for their oil.

So your warmongering hero is not only a warmonger by your standards he put the world on notice he would be a war criminal as well.

I hope they lock up all the Trump boot lickers if he does act and commits a war crime or Geneva Convention violation such as ordering torture or deliberate bombing civilians as Assad and Putin have been doing.

The majority of the DC in the beltway Political Class of which Hillary is the little darling of, is living in a bizarre delusion of Cold War era antagonism with Russia while at the same time thinking of them as a defeated power to be pushed around.

IMO, Hillary's policies would have increased risk of war with Russia, and certainly led to, at least, a new Cold War.


IMO, Trump is an outsider who realizes that the COld War is over, and that we have no conflict of interests with Russia. I fully expect good relations to develop very quickly.

 

[Correll]

Correll, post: 16429086

With Trump, I am sure that the policy will be crafted to avoid WWIII.

I'm sure Sec of Defense Mad Dog Mattis will construct a much less diplomatic and carefully negotiated safe zone policy in Syria than Clinton's pick would have done.

Assad and Putin are both in Iran's camp. But Mattis is of the belief that Iran supports ISIS.

Is that your belief.

.
Iran is on the mind of nearly every senior Marine I’ve ever come in contact with, including Mattis. It was back in 2012, while he was still in uniform, that Mattis said that the three gravest threats facing the U.S. were “Iran, Iran, Iran.” In the years since his retirement in 2013, he’s been even more outspoken. He repeated his “Iran, Iran, Iran” mantra last April (in addition to an entirely predictable reference to the Beirut barracks bombing) during an appearance at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, and then explained himself. Iran, he said, is “the single most enduring threat to stability and peace in the Middle East,” and not really a nation-state at all but “a revolutionary cause devoted to mayhem.”

Then, Mattis linked Iran to the rise of ISIS. “I consider ISIS nothing more than an excuse for Iran to continue its mischief,” he said. “Iran is not an enemy of ISIS; they have a lot to gain from the turmoil that ISIS creates.” What Mattis said next was eerily reminiscent of George W. Bush’s claim that because Al Qaeda wasn’t attacking Saddam Hussein, the two must be linked: “I would just point out one question for you to look into,” Mattis intoned. “What is the one country in the Middle East that has not been attacked by ISIS? One. That is Iran. That is more than happenstance, I’m sure.”

James Mattis’ 33-Year Grudge Against Iran




Being so careless with objective reality about Iran and ISIS must have been what attracted Trump to Mattis. They have so much in common in that regard.

Your faith in HIllary is noted. Luckily for all of us, imo, it will never be tested.

 

[whitehall]

The trouble with the left is that they are confused about the term "relationship". Some lefties probably think a relationship is a short sexual encounter in the bus station while other pop-culture educated lefties probably think of dating sites like E-Harmony. Relationships between countries are different. You can't even call them relationships. Bill Clinton thought we had a good "relationship" with China after he sold them ICBM technology and he probably thought we had a good relationship with Yugoslavia when he bombed them into the stone age after he was caught with his pants down. Haven't we learned that it's better to have a good diplomatic relationship with a country rather than a bad one? Didn't I see radical lefties waving North Vietnam and Russian flags around in protests during the Vietnam conflict? What kind of relationship did the left want back then?

 

[whutTHEYsay]

whitehall, post: 16430364

Haven't we learned that it's better to have a good diplomatic relationship with a country rather than a bad one?

Of course. We have had a working relationship with Russia on areas we agree. But it does nothing to praise Putin and Assad for the Genocide they are doing in Syria.

The problem is praising leaders like Putin that violate international norms and laws and are antagonistic to freedom loving societies. We should not praise our own leaders when they do it too. Such as Bush and Cheney invading Iraq.

Did you reject or approve Obama's diplomatic deal with Iran? Is it better to have that diplomatic relationship with Iran at least on the nuclear issue, or do we let them develop the bomb or start a war over it?

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Correll, post: 16430298

IMO, Trump is an outsider who realizes that the COld War is over, and that we have no conflict of interests with Russia. I fully expect good relations to develop very quickly.

That's the point about your hypocrisy of critizing Obama for the UN abstention on settlements in Israel yet supporting good relations with Russia although they voted yes.

You see you are a two faced hypocrit and partisan hack because of that.

As a Republican Iraq warmonger you should not be criticizing Obama for supporting a two state solution just as Russia and the rest of the world does. You were agitating for more conflict in Arab and Jewish relations by siding with Netanyahu when he attacked our President who was on the right side of the issue along with Putin.

 

[Correll]

Correll, post: 16430298

IMO, Trump is an outsider who realizes that the COld War is over, and that we have no conflict of interests with Russia. I fully expect good relations to develop very quickly.

That's the point about your hypocrisy of critizing Obama for the UN abstention on settlements in Israel yet supporting good relations with Russia although they voted yes.

You see you are a two faced hypocrit and partisan hack because of that.

As a Republican Iraq warmonger you should not be criticizing Obama for supporting a two state solution just as Russia and the rest of the world does. You were agitating for more conflict in Arab and Jewish relations by siding with Netanyahu when he attacked our President who was on the right side of the issue along with Putin.

IMO, us russian relations are NOT based on our two nation's working in harmony on the two state solution.


That is certainly NOT cause for a new Cold War.

Your attempt to gin that up as an excuse to accuse me of being a partisan hypocrite is meaningless garbage.

I supported Netanyahu in his conflict with Obama, because Obama was a ******* ass. He seemed to think that Israel was a client state and that he could bluster an elected head of state into doing what he was told.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Correll, post: 1643271

IMO, us russian relations are NOT based on our two nation's working in harmony on the two state solution.

Then why condemn what Obama did?

And what are you basing working in harmony with Russia upon? Killing Syrian opposition women children and the elderly to the Assad regime?

We have already been cooperating with Russia. when they do focus on ISIS.

Russia supports our military land route through Russian territories.

Russia responded to Obama's demand to remove all Assad's Chem/Bio weapons and production facilities.

That's harmony already in existence.

Russian meddling to sway our election is not something Russia deserves a friendlier relationship with us as the submissive partner.

Spineless Trump may feel that way but I'm not buying into that cowardly crap.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Correll, post: 16432716

I supported Netanyahu in his conflict with Obama, because Obama was a ******* ass. He seemed to think that Israel was a client state and that he could bluster an elected head of state into doing what he was told.

It 'seems' to you that Obama treated Israel like a Client State. What the hell does that mean.

Are we obligated to give in to Israel when we and the rest of the world believe they are doing something wrong.

I guess you are saying that the US must be subservient to Israel and do whatever a far right Israeli PM demands that we do.

Even when the rest of the world including Russia and the four other permanent members on the UNSC believes Netanyahu to be in the wrong on this.

Client state crap is something you've made up.

 

[Correll]

Correll, post: 1643271

IMO, us russian relations are NOT based on our two nation's working in harmony on the two state solution.

Then why condemn what Obama did?

Because we want our government to support Israel.

And what are you basing working in harmony with Russia upon? Killing Syrian opposition women children and the elderly to the Assad regime?....

Not having a Cold War, or a HOt War. That is what I want from Russia. Anything more is a bonus.

 

[Correll]

Correll, post: 16432716

I supported Netanyahu in his conflict with Obama, because Obama was a ******* ass. He seemed to think that Israel was a client state and that he could bluster an elected head of state into doing what he was told.

It 'seems' to you that Obama treated Israel like a Client State. What the hell does that mean.

It means exactly what I said. None of those words were more than two syllables.

You can use this is you have to.

Dictionary.com | Meanings and Definitions of Words at Dictionary.com

Are we obligated to give in to Israel when we and the rest of the world believe they are doing something wrong.

Why lump "We" and the "rest of the world" together?

I guess you are saying that the US must be subservient to Israel and do whatever a far right Israeli PM demands that we do.

Nothing I said, supports that moronic statement of yours.

Even when the rest of the world including Russia and the four other permanent members on the UNSC believes Netanyahu to be in the wrong on this.

Logical Fallacy of Appeal to Popularity.

Client state crap is something you've made up.

It is my opinion based on my understanding of liberals, and observing Obama's behavior, and netanyahu's response.


Nothing you have said has offered any substantive challenge to my opinion on that.

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Correll, post: 16438022

It means exactly what I said. None of those words were more than two syllables.

Words are just words. I understand what a client state is and you used the words "it seems" which makes the basis of your claim absolutely so vague that no one can know what the hell you are blabbering about.

Apparently as usual you don't know either.

You could provide an example based upon some kinds of statements or facts on the matter.

 

[Correll]

Correll, post: 16438022

It means exactly what I said. None of those words were more than two syllables.

Words are just words. I understand what a client state is and you used the words "it seems" which makes the basis of your claim absolutely so vague that no one can know what the hell you are blabbering about.

Apparently as usual you don't know either.

You could provide an example based upon some kinds of statements or facts on the matter.

Seems a waste of time with you. You are not going to seriously address anything I say regardless, so....

 

[whutTHEYsay]

Correll, post: 16439257

Seems a waste of time with you. You are not going to seriously address anything I say regardless, so....

So you have something but won't post it.

That seems to be a pattern with you when your arguments reach a dead end.

So you make decisions about politics based upon what 'seems' to you to be a fact.

Just trying to understand where and on what basis you post your unsubstantiated and factless based opinions upon.